scholarly journals Effects of Teaching Presentation Methods and Visual and Auditory Working Memory Capacity on Young Children’s Learning Effectiveness

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 721-740
Author(s):  
Yun Hyun Pack ◽  
Na Ya Choi ◽  
Bokyung Kim
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Higher Learning ◽  
Teaching Material ◽  
Auditory Information ◽  
Learning Effectiveness ◽  
Presentation Methods

Objectives: This study investigates the effects of teaching material presentation methods and young children's visual and auditory working memory capacity on their learning effectiveness. It also suggests effective instructional design and teaching-learning methods suitable for children’s information processing characteristics.Methods: Participants included 86 five-year-old children enrolled in kindergartens in Seoul, Gyeonggi, Incheon, and Daejeon. Three categories of teaching materials with different presentation methods were created. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the category groups, and participated in learning activities. After the activities, learning effectiveness, working memory, and attention were measured. Data were analyzed using SPSS 20.0.Results: Results indicated that children’s learning effectiveness differed according to the teaching material presentation method. Higher learning effectiveness was observed when auditory and visual information was presented concurrently rather than sequentially, but learning was not affected by the sequential order. The groups with larger auditory working memory capacity and larger visual working memory capacity achieved higher learning effectiveness than did their respective counterparts. Additionally, learning effectiveness was greater for children with larger auditory working memory capacity when presented with auditory information before visual, and for those with larger visual working memory capacity when presented with visual information before auditory.Conclusion: The study results enhance foundational knowledge related to individual differences in young children's visual and auditory information processing abilities. Moreover, this study has practical implications for developing instructional materials and proposals suitable for young children’s individual information processing characteristics.

Greater Visual Working Memory Capacity for Visually Matched Stimuli When They Are Perceived as Meaningful

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 902-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel E. Asp ◽  
Viola S. Störmer ◽  
Timothy F. Brady
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Visual Working Memory ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Visual Complexity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Subjective Perception ◽  
Neural Delay ◽  
Meaningful Stimuli

Abstract Almost all models of visual working memory—the cognitive system that holds visual information in an active state—assume it has a fixed capacity: Some models propose a limit of three to four objects, where others propose there is a fixed pool of resources for each basic visual feature. Recent findings, however, suggest that memory performance is improved for real-world objects. What supports these increases in capacity? Here, we test whether the meaningfulness of a stimulus alone influences working memory capacity while controlling for visual complexity and directly assessing the active component of working memory using EEG. Participants remembered ambiguous stimuli that could either be perceived as a face or as meaningless shapes. Participants had higher performance and increased neural delay activity when the memory display consisted of more meaningful stimuli. Critically, by asking participants whether they perceived the stimuli as a face or not, we also show that these increases in visual working memory capacity and recruitment of additional neural resources are because of the subjective perception of the stimulus and thus cannot be driven by physical properties of the stimulus. Broadly, this suggests that the capacity for active storage in visual working memory is not fixed but that more meaningful stimuli recruit additional working memory resources, allowing them to be better remembered.

Working Memory: Models and Applications

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stoo Sepp ◽  
Steven J. Howard ◽  
Sharon Tindall-Ford ◽  
Shirley Agostinho ◽  
Fred Paas
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Auditory Information ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory

In 1956, Miller first reported on a capacity limitation in the amount of information the human brain can process, which was thought to be seven plus or minus two items. The system of memory used to process information for immediate use was coined “working memory” by Miller, Galanter, and Pribram in 1960. In 1968, Atkinson and Shiffrin proposed their multistore model of memory, which theorized that the memory system was separated into short-term memory, long-term memory, and the sensory register, the latter of which temporarily holds and forwards information from sensory inputs to short term-memory for processing. Baddeley and Hitch built upon the concept of multiple stores, leading to the development of the multicomponent model of working memory in 1974, which described two stores devoted to the processing of visuospatial and auditory information, both coordinated by a central executive system. Later, Cowan’s theorizing focused on attentional factors in the effortful and effortless activation and maintenance of information in working memory. In 1988, Cowan published his model—the scope and control of attention model. In contrast, since the early 2000s Engle has investigated working memory capacity through the lens of his individual differences model, which does not seek to quantify capacity in the same way as Miller or Cowan. Instead, this model describes working memory capacity as the interplay between primary memory (working memory), the control of attention, and secondary memory (long-term memory). This affords the opportunity to focus on individual differences in working memory capacity and extend theorizing beyond storage to the manipulation of complex information. These models and advancements have made significant contributions to understandings of learning and cognition, informing educational research and practice in particular. Emerging areas of inquiry include investigating use of gestures to support working memory processing, leveraging working memory measures as a means to target instructional strategies for individual learners, and working memory training. Given that working memory is still debated, and not yet fully understood, researchers continue to investigate its nature, its role in learning and development, and its implications for educational curricula, pedagogy, and practice.

Visual Information Can Hinder Working Memory Processing of Speech

2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 1120-1132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sushmit Mishra ◽  
Thomas Lunner ◽  
Stefan Stenfelt ◽  
Jerker Rönnberg ◽  
Mary Rudner
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Free Recall ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Recall Performance ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Spare Capacity ◽  
Executive Processing

Purpose The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the new Cognitive Spare Capacity Test (CSCT), which measures aspects of working memory capacity for heard speech in the audiovisual and auditory-only modalities of presentation. Method In Experiment 1, 20 young adults with normal hearing performed the CSCT and an independent battery of cognitive tests. In the CSCT, they listened to and recalled 2-digit numbers according to instructions inducing executive processing at 2 different memory loads. In Experiment 2, 10 participants performed a less executively demanding free recall task using the same stimuli. Results CSCT performance demonstrated an effect of memory load and was associated with independent measures of executive function and inference making but not with general working memory capacity. Audiovisual presentation was associated with lower CSCT scores but higher free recall performance scores. Conclusions CSCT is an executively challenging test of the ability to process heard speech. It captures cognitive aspects of listening related to sentence comprehension that are quantitatively and qualitatively different from working memory capacity. Visual information provided in the audiovisual modality of presentation can hinder executive processing in working memory of nondegraded speech material.

scholarly journals Working memory capacity in the production and acquisition of a syntactic rule in L2 speech

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyria R Finardi ◽  
Rosane Silveira
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Syntactic Rule ◽  
Processing Theory ◽  
Speech Information

This study investigates the extent to which working memory capacity is related to the production and acquisition of a syntactic structure of L2 speech. Information Processing Theory guides the research, as the authors assume the operation of a dual code cognitive system made up of a rule-based and a memory-based system (SKEHAN, 1998) responsible for analyzing and synthesizing language, respectively. L2 acquisition is also discussed in terms of processing input for meaning and form. Overall results show that working memory capacity is related to the production and acquisition of a syntactic structure in L2 speech, but this relationship is stronger for acquisition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document